Washington (CNN) -- In a major defeat for supporters of tougher gun laws, the U.S. Senate on Wednesday defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on firearms sales.
The bipartisan plan brokered by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, and Pat Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, was backed by President Barack Obama in his push for a package of gun laws in the aftermath of the Newtown school massacre.
However, fierce opposition by the powerful National Rifle Association led a backlash by conservative Republicans and a few Democrats from pro-gun states that doomed the amendment to the broader package of legislation.
Due to procedural steps by Republican opponents, the amendment required 60 votes to pass in the 100-member chamber, meaning Democrats and their Independent allies who hold 55 seats needed support from some GOP senators to push them through.
The final vote was 54 in favor to 46 opposed with two Republicans joining most Democrats in supporting the compromise.
The overall gun legislation includes tougher laws on gun trafficking and straw purchases, and steps to devise ways to improve safety in schools.
It would be the most significant gun legislation before Congress in almost two decades, and comes four months after the December shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, that killed 20 first-graders and six educators.
Obama pushed hard for Congress to include expanded background checks in any gun package and the White House campaigned in support of the Manchin-Toomey compromise.
However, the NRA promised political retribution against supporters of tougher gun laws.
"You may not win today ... but I will say that you did the right thing," veteran GOP Sen. John McCain of Arizona said in praising Manchin and Toomey tor political courage in proposing their compromise. McCain was one of three Republicans who supported the compromise.
Manchin earlier sounded resigned to defeat, telling his colleagues that regardless of how the chamber votes, the issue of background checks "is not going to go away."
The NRA has said an expanded background check system would be the first step toward a national gun registry and therefore a violation of the constitutional right to bear arms.
Manchin and other supporters rejected that claim, noting the compromise amendment prohibited a national gun registry and criminalizes misusing background check data for that purpose.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid warned Republicans that the strong majority of Americans who support expanded background checks won't forget votes against the Manchin-Toomey compromise.
"The American people ... have a long, long memory," he said.
Meanwhile, conservative Republicans proposed an alternative package of gun laws that reflected the NRA position.
The GOP plan, introduced Wednesday after weeks of hearings and debate on Democratic proposals, lacked any expansion of background checks but called for more funding to better enforce the existing system.
A sponsor of the Republican alternative, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, said it would target the gun violence problem in a way that the Democratic proposal before the Senate would not.
In response, Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Pat Leahy, D-Vermont, called the GOP's last-minute proposal a "weak and counterproductive alternative."
Other proposed amendments to the gun package sent to the Senate by Leahy's committee include a ban on semi-automatic firearms modeled after military assault weapons sponsored by Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, and a plan by Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas to make state concealed weapons permits acceptable throughout the country.
The Senate debate was expected to last several days and any legislation passed would then go to the Republican-led House. So far, House Speaker John Boehner has stopped short of promising a vote on whatever the Senate sends over.
Obama and others have been highlighting daily gun violence in America in their appeal to lawmakers for stricter limits.
Many in Washington have coalesced around expanding background checks conducted on gun sales. However, settling on the exact mechanism of such a step has been difficult in a sharply divided political climate, with the NRA leading a strong lobbying effort against proposed changes

Carskibum

04-17-2013 03:59 PM

So was the AW ban attached to this or no?

Xcelratr

04-17-2013 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nt_loader
(Post 15349490)

Geez even I support the background checks :yikes:

You support the expanded background checks proposed by the defeated amendment, or you support more funding to better enforce the existing system as counter-proposed, or you support no change to the existing system of background checks?

And whats your reasoning?

Nt_loader

04-17-2013 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carskibum
(Post 15349499)

So was the AW ban attached to this or no?

No I believe that was removed and will not be voted on.

Nt_loader

04-17-2013 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xcelratr
(Post 15349525)

You support the expanded background checks proposed by the defeated amendment, or you support more funding to better enforce the existing system as counter-proposed, or you support no change to the existing system of background checks?

And whats your reasoning?

You support the expanded background checks proposed by the defeated amendment: Yes, anyone trying to purchase a gun should follow the same process, regardless of private sales or not. Reasoning: An effort to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. I know they will continue to obtain them but this is one more obsticle they need to face.

You support more funding to better enforce the existing system as counter-proposed: Yes I support this as well, I believe both are needed to reduce the change of enabling criminals to obtain guns.

As do vast majorities (~90%) of Americans, including majorities of Republicans, law enforcement folks, military (active and veterans) and even gun owners. So, the obvious question, just who are those Senators who voted against this reasonable, bi-partisan bill representing? I mean, I don't think even 90% of Americans love their own mothers!

Sentaruu

04-17-2013 04:30 PM

i am so glad it failed. where are you getting your stats from rhumb?

joeski3d

04-17-2013 04:46 PM

Just shows the senate, as usual, is ignoring their constituents and doing whatever they get outside funding to do.

Cabrio330

04-17-2013 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhumb
(Post 15349618)

So, the obvious question, just who are those Senators who voted against this reasonable, bi-partisan bill representing? I mean, I don't think even 90% of Americans love their own mothers!

Perhaps the bill itself isn't reasonable after all? I am sure you have heard that at least occassionally the legislative process produces an unreasonable/ineffective bill that even the most partisan politicians realize would be a mistake. And certainly we should expect that a bill written while emotions are running high might not be the most reasonable. If the proposed bill were as reasonable as you suggest, how else do you explain it's failure to pass? Do you really think something reasonable would encounter this much opposition?

Sometimes the obvious answer to your obvious question is in fact the correct answer!

MpoweredM

04-17-2013 04:48 PM

Is there more information on what specifically was in the Bill? I can't believe it was only universal background checks?

Cabrio330

04-17-2013 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeski3d
(Post 15349686)

Just shows the senate, as usual, is ignoring their constituents and doing whatever they get outside funding to do.

Or maybe they are acknowledging that their job is to ensure that any bill they pass needs to be reasonable and effective, and not just vote based on opinion polls. In other words, doing the job they were elected to do. Do you really think that an elected representative should always vote based on what is popular?

Just because 90% of Americans support an idea, doesn't mean the bill that is presented accomplishes the idea that was measured by the polls. I am sure the polls cited asked simple questions like, do you support increased background checks, which not surprisingly (to me) garnered 90% support. But if you have ever read federal legislation, you will know that it never limits itself to simple ideas.

Xcelratr

04-17-2013 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nt_loader
(Post 15349539)

Yes, anyone trying to purchase a gun should follow the same process, regardless of private sales or not. Reasoning: An effort to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. I know they will continue to obtain them but this is one more obsticle they need to face.

Yes I support this as well, I believe both are needed to reduce the change of enabling criminals to obtain guns.

So which proposal would you instruct your Senator to vote for/support?

joeski3d

04-17-2013 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cabrio330
(Post 15349715)

Or maybe they are acknowledging that their job is to ensure that any bill they pass needs to be reasonable and effective, ...

wait... the US senate? :spit:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cabrio330
(Post 15349715)

...and not just vote based on opinion polls. In other words, doing the job they were elected to do. Do you really think that an elected representative should always vote based on what is popular?

It's not a matter of popularity. It's their job (I know... still laughing) to acknowledge and represent the majority. They are shooting something down (notice the pun?) that a very vocal overwhelming majority are in favor of. Can you say lobbyist?

They are shooting something down (notice the pun?) that a very vocal overwhelming majority are in favor of. Can you say lobbyist?

Says who? The White House? CNN? MSNBC?

david05111

04-17-2013 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhumb
(Post 15349618)

As do vast majorities (~90%) of Americans, including majorities of Republicans, law enforcement folks, military (active and veterans) and even gun owners. So, the obvious question, just who are those Senators who voted against this reasonable, bi-partisan bill representing? I mean, I don't think even 90% of Americans love their own mothers!

Misleading statistics are misleading. Take that 90% with a grain of salt, just like the 40% figure for gun transfers outside of dealers that they keep throwing around. That 90% is horseshit...its the way the question is asked.

A new national poll suggests that support for major restrictions on guns may be fading, three months after the horrific shootings at an elementary school in Connecticut.

Although a majority of Americans favored major restrictions on guns or an outright ban in the wake of the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, when a heavily armed gunman killed 20 young students and six adults, a new CNN/ORC International survey indicates that support has tumbled to just 43%, as more time has passed since that December tragedy.

joeski3d

04-17-2013 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serbonze
(Post 15349813)

Says who? The White House? CNN? MSNBC?

The overwhelming majority ignored.

NRA happy.

1+1 = __

Sentaruu

04-17-2013 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeski3d
(Post 15349872)

The overwhelming majority ignored.

NRA happy.

1+1 = __

how do you know that the majority actually wanted gun control? what credible statistics are you basing your statements off of?

joeski3d

04-17-2013 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sentaruu
(Post 15349880)

how do you know that the majority actually wanted gun control? what credible statistics are you basing your statements off of?

The majority wanted background checks for gun purchases. This should not be breaking news, based on the conversation you are trying to engage in.